k8scortex-mcp

create_secret

Creates a Kubernetes Opaque Secret. Accepts plain text key-value pairs for automatic base64 encoding or a full YAML manifest for advanced use.

Instructions

Creates a new Opaque Secret. Use either basic stringData or provide a raw YAML manifest. stringData values will be base64-encoded automatically.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "namespace": "<namespace>"
    },
    "name": "create_secret"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`dryRun`	No	If true, simulates the action without making changes
`cluster`	No	Target cluster name (default: 'default')
`namespace`	Yes	The Kubernetes namespace
`secretName`	No	The name of the Secret to create
`stringData`	No	Plain text key-value pairs. Will be encoded automatically.
`yamlManifest`	No	Full YAML manifest for advanced Secret creation

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.2Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that stringData values are base64-encoded automatically, which is important. It does not mention authentication, permissions, rate limits, or whether the operation is idempotent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with key purpose, no unnecessary words. Each sentence provides essential information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description should briefly mention what the tool returns (e.g., 'Returns the created Secret metadata'). It explains parameters and usage modes, but lacks return value information.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining the choice between stringData and yamlManifest, and the automatic encoding for stringData.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Creates a new Opaque Secret' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes between two methods (stringData vs YAML manifest), but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like create_configmap.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description advises 'Use either basic stringData or provide a raw YAML manifest', giving usage guidance. However, it does not specify when to avoid this tool or how it compares to similar tools for other resource types.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server